• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

On April 23, Doug Hagmann exposed Canada Free Press readers to the theory that simmering social unrest in America and (to a slightly lesser extent) across the globe is “not due to Obama’s inexperience or failed policies. Rather, it is the direct result of the implementation of his successful policies.”

I’ve been saying this for some time, but I was still gratified to hear Hagmann say it, and that his column and May 7 followup piece gleaned significant exposure. Attributing his information to an anonymous insider, Hagmann outlines how the Obama administration is covertly utilizing prominent agitators among the political left to incite chaos, and eventually violence, based on racial and class factors, while the administration continues to sabotage America’s economic engine. The latter efforts are also intended to catalyze widespread civil unrest.

Implementation of this plan is, according to Hagmann’s source, being carried out via Obama’s unelected czars and heavily involves the Department of Homeland Security. From lower-level DHS agents making payments to street-level agitators, to former green energy czar Van Jones mentoring Occupy leaders, to coordination with political allies such as the New Black Panther Party and the Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan, the administration has all bases covered. Cultural balkanization and another heavy hit to the economy are calculated to result in unprecedented rioting and finally widespread public pandemonium followed by implementation of martial law.

The objectives here are personal power for Obama, of course, and a coalescing of the federal government’s authority; the goal, the destruction of the United States of America as a constitutional republic.

Like the class-warfare issue, the racial component is only a part of the agenda, but this being America, it is a significant one. In the operational sense, it is both a sad irony and potentially very dangerous that the left has managed to grow up a crop of black Americans who are as ignorant, belligerent and destructive as white bigots of bygone days falsely contended.

Based on who and what I knew Obama to be – and I knew this well before he was elected – when he did win the presidency, my immediate thought was This is one mother****er who’s going to do his level best to stay in office permanently.

When I called Obama a communist in 2008 and 2009, even conservatives giggled, but it made perfect sense to me. Everyone of significance in the man’s life had either been a card-carrying communist, or their worldview was principally based on Marxism. The Black Liberation Theology (effectively an oxymoron) in which Obama was schooled for 20 years has its roots in Marxism, as does the social justice doctrine to which he, his minions and their useful liberal idiots so dearly adhere.

When racial tension increased amidst Obama’s deleterious weighing-in on issues like the Henry Gates affair in 2009, the administration’s refusal to prosecute members of the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation and revelations that Eric Holder’s DOJ wasn’t prosecuting blacks for anything they could remotely rationalize as political (including black-on-white crime), most people saw poor leadership or a bumbling incompetent. I, however, saw nascent choreography, the subtle inflaming of black resentment and the abrading of old scars.

All of this – as I believed then as well as now – was calculated to cultivate a black populace that would be ready to take to the streets at the slightest provocation. As recently as this weekend, Obama’s mealymouthed attorney general, Eric Holder, invoked the name of Trayvon Martin at a meeting of the Detroit chapter of the NAACP.

Obama implemented his big-government takeover so rapidly after taking office that even those who had his number were surprised. Ostensibly, these were remedial measures to address the economic implosion he and his activist cronies helped bring about via collaboration with government power players, but they were over-reaching. When detractors pointed this out, Obama countered with jokes concerning people complaining about “socialist mops.”

It might be hard at times to discern whether Obama is a communist, an Islamist, or a nihilist who simply wants to see the world burn. His actions in America certainly indicate a desire to culminate 100 years of Marxist wet dreams; however, his furtive participation in the “Arab Spring” that is sweeping Middle Eastern and Arab nations suggests a yearning to touch off a global conflagration that would indeed have the world burning for decades, so pernicious are Islamists’ designs for a worldwide caliphate. This obviously could not be actualized without tens – if not hundreds of millions – of deaths.

Now, I wouldn’t want anyone to get the impression that I think I’m the only one who knew what was going on. Obviously there are others, but when you have allegedly conservative journalists and commentators suggesting that Barack Obama might be a socialist, or kind of a far-left guy (instead of a naked communist) at this stage of the game, there’s a serious perceptual problem in play. Even now, we hear people who ought to know better explaining away Obama’s sinister executive orders as boilerplate, run-of-the-mill formalities.

We’ve gone beyond the frog in the pot of water who doesn’t realize he’s being slowly boiled. The frog has been doused with gasoline and ignited, and it’s time for him to start screaming.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.